Why aren't YouTube links allowed in the language forums?
- Thread starter lilison
- Start date
Hello lilison,
I have moved your question to the Comments & Suggestions Forum, where such questions of policy and procedure within WRF are discussed.
As a moderator, I am responsible for checking any link that a member posts in a language thread to make sure they are appropriate and not violating copyright laws--and I do my best to do so.
With a brief document link, that is fairly easy. YouTube links are generally long and honestly, we do not have the time as mods to do such verification.
A further explanation for this is given by a moderator colleague in this previous thread.
I have moved your question to the Comments & Suggestions Forum, where such questions of policy and procedure within WRF are discussed.
As a moderator, I am responsible for checking any link that a member posts in a language thread to make sure they are appropriate and not violating copyright laws--and I do my best to do so.
With a brief document link, that is fairly easy. YouTube links are generally long and honestly, we do not have the time as mods to do such verification.
A further explanation for this is given by a moderator colleague in this previous thread.
Last edited:
It's partly to do with copyright, but it's also to deter the type of question which asks "What does he/she say at point x:xx in the video: I can't hear/understand it" These are almost always unanswerable without watching it, and thus violate the principle that in our language forums the question should, as far as is reasonably practicable, be answerable from the information given in the post.
There is also the problem that because of copyright restrictions, video clips on some sites are sometimes not accessible in certain countries (I think the way that works is that they block the IP you're using - but don't quote me on that
).
And finally there is the problem that YouTube in particular is notorious for removing videos at no notice either because of alleged copyright infringement or because the person who uploaded it has taken it down. Either way, it usually renders the question impossible to subsequently answer, and thus the thread is then virtually useless from the point of view of building up an archived database of information.
There is also the problem that because of copyright restrictions, video clips on some sites are sometimes not accessible in certain countries (I think the way that works is that they block the IP you're using - but don't quote me on that
).And finally there is the problem that YouTube in particular is notorious for removing videos at no notice either because of alleged copyright infringement or because the person who uploaded it has taken it down. Either way, it usually renders the question impossible to subsequently answer, and thus the thread is then virtually useless from the point of view of building up an archived database of information.
OK, yes, there might be a problem if a video gets deleted by YT or the owner. Yet, I guess one could, for example, explain their enquiry deeply and add that they came across it in a video called ..... (and provides the title and the time) instead of providing the link. Just like we provide titles of books in threads One day I provided just the title of a video and my post was edited and the link got deleted.It's partly to do with copyright, but it's also to deter the type of question which asks "What does he/she say at point x:xx in the video: I can't hear/understand it" These are almost always unanswerable without watching it, and thus violate the principle that in the language forums the question should, as far as is reasonably practicable, be answerable from the information given in the post.
There is also the problem that because of copyright restrictions, video clips on some sites are sometimes not accessible in certain countries (I think the way that works is that they block the IP you're using - but don't quote me on that
And finally there is the problem that YouTube in particular is notorious for removing videos at no notice either because of alleged copyright infringement or because the person who uploaded it has taken it down. Either way, it usually renders the question impossible to subsequently answer, and thus the thread is then virtually useless from the point of view of building up an archived database of information.
So I would recommend allowing users to provide titles of YT videos, with the condition that the exact time when a given phrase was used is provided.
Wouldn't it help us all if I could provide at least the title rather than sending the link in a private conversation?
Last edited by a moderator:
It depends on how you've framed the question.
As I've explained, links are a no-no, but as long as there's no suggestion that members need to watch the video in order to be able to answer it, I can't off the top of my head think of a reason why there should be any great objection to giving the title of the video and nothing else as your source, in the same way that you would cite the title of a book, a song or a poem.
Exactly, but this needs to be clear in the forum rules. As I said, knowing there might be no YT links, I once provided just the title and it got deleted with the moderator note saying I broke the forum rules.
I thought it was. This is what Rule 4 says:
No audio or video files or links may be inserted without prior moderator approval.
I would have said that was covered by Rule 4, too:
Always acknowledge the source.
Having now explained the background to questions based on video links (and perhaps I should add that I'm not aware of any plans to change our policy on this) I think you might perhaps find it easier to simply find a forum or a site where links to audio/video files are allowed, if they're the type of questions you want to ask, rather than struggle to keep within the rules we have for our language forums here and end up not getting the range of answers which you'd receive as a result of people actually watching the clip.